Documentary arts relies on a definition that's similar to this one given by Mimi Fine Arts: "Any artwork the purpose of which is to present facts objectively, without inserting fictional matter, recording and/or commenting on some content, often political or social, by accumulating factual detail." That's a fine definition, except that it's completely wrong on one point: objectivity doesn't exist in that way simply because bias is inherent in how we perceive things.
(click above to read more)
What's important to remember here is that it's impossible to be unbiased, and it's impossible to present facts objectively. Everything we see, feel, touch, hear, taste and then how we report on those things is based on our interpretation in that moment. Journalism schools tries to pound into their students' heads that the basis of news is objectivity, or the statement of facts. I know because I graduated from one. But even the straight headline of "Car Accident Kills Two on Main Street" is biased. How many cars were there? Did the weather affect driving conditions? What about speed, alcohol, or a heart attack? By adding or not adding any piece of information leads towards bias in a direction, whether intentional or not.
It's this that I have a problem with that definition of the Documentary Arts. Yes, I get the point and the spirit behind the Documentary Arts, and the approach is admirable if the artist's intent is to be as unbiased as possible. But there's a very serious disservice being done by suggesting that "presenting facts objectively" equals some level of truth. The truth is that whatever is reported is whatever the artist wants the public to see and hear. Obscuring this leads to greater ignorance over greater intelligence.
This is important for me to state this because I want people to know where I'm coming from and how I'm approaching this project. I will walk from village to village historically important to flamenco and I will document what I see today, and I'll call that flamenco, and it will be flamenco, and it will be a part of the Documentary Arts as well whether the paintings are figurative or abstract. Yes, even abstract is documentary and a presentation of the "facts", as they may be, because if there is nothing to report then that can still be reported. It's the same with chaos. The truth is what one experiences, how one interprets, and what and how one reports this. By dumbing down Documentary Arts as something pure and without bias is irresponsible at best. I won't do that. You can bet I'll tell you what I experience, and it will be a fine addition to the Documentary Arts.